The Tasmania Project Wellbeing Survey - Premier's Economic ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Photo: Tourism Tasmania and ChrisCrerar
Cover image to be inserted here.
Links to ISC website to be inserted in final pdf.
The Tasmania Project
Wellbeing Survey
Report for the Premier's Economic
and Social Recovery Advisory
Council
Report for the Premier’s Economic and
Social
March 2021 Recovery Advisory Council
The Tasmania Project Wellbeing Survey
March 2021 | Institute for Social Change
Report information
Prepared for the Premier’s Economic and Social Recovery Advisory Council, Tasmania
Lead Researcher: Professor Libby Lester, Director, Institute for Social Change
Research Team: Dr Rebecca Banham, Ella Horton, Nyree Pisanu, Ariel Remund, Ruth Steel, Professor Natalie
Stoeckl, Georgia Sutton, and Professor Bruce Tranter
Survey Acknowledgements
Thank you to the many organisations, agencies and individuals who generously provided their time to support this
research, most notably TasCOSS, Colony 47 and Neighbourhood/Community Houses, and to the more than 3000
Tasmanian residents who participated in the survey and interviews.
The work was funded by the Tasmanian Department of Treasury and Finance, the Department of Communities and
the University of Tasmania.
Thank you to Quin Welsford-Brink, Michael Helman and the volunteer and student interviewers: Alex Burton, Vesife
Hatisaru, Ruvini Buddhika Jayasekara, Hannah Shaw, Phuong Thao Linh Nguyen and Tamar Campbell.
Creative Commons Licence
Contact
Institute for Social Change
College of Arts, Law and Education
Private Bag 44
University of Tasmania
Hobart TAS 7001
thetasmaniaproject@utas.edu.au
Image caption and Photo: Name Surname
Suggested Citation
The recommended citation for this report is: Lester, L. et al. (2021) Report for the Premier's Economic and Social
Recovery Advisory Committee: The Tasmania Project Wellbeing Survey, Institute for Social Change, University of
Tasmania, Hobart.
Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................... 4
Tasmania’s regions......................................................................... 7
The indicators ................................................................................. 8
Health ............................................................................................. 20
Life satisfaction .............................................................................. 24
Environment ................................................................................... 28
Community ..................................................................................... 33
Income ............................................................................................. 37
Work-life balance ........................................................................... 40
Safety ............................................................................................. 43
Housing .......................................................................................... 46
Jobs ................................................................................................ 49
Civic engagement .......................................................................... 55
Education ....................................................................................... 61
Appendices..................................................................................... 66
Indicator descriptors .................................................................................. 67
Survey demographics ............................................................................... 68
Contact list ................................................................................................. 71
.
The full report with additional appendices is
available from the Institute for Social Change.
3
Image caption and Photo: NameSurname
Focused place-based
research to support
Tasmania’s recovery Photo: Capitano Productions Eye / Shutterstock.com
from COVID-19
Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic, which WHO The Tasmania Project
declared on 11 March 2020, has interrupted The Tasmania Project was established by the Institute for
Social Change at the University of Tasmania in March 2020 on
social, economic and cultural life, with that basis that a more focused style of data collection would be
escalating rates of infection and death in required to understand the pandemic’s immediate impact on
Tasmania. The Institute was also aware that longer-term
many parts of the world. Uncertainty questions about future social, economic and cultural policy were
continues about the virus’ path, vaccine going to be asked and directions determined given the extent of
availability and efficacy, and the full disruption.
economic and social impacts of the The Tasmania Project is a University-wide research vehicle
pandemic. Tasmania was the first Australian designed in collaboration with partners to support data
collection and communication from and with a diverse cross-
state to instigate border restrictions, and its section of Tasmanian residents. The project’s aims are to
island status and demographics (for support immediate and longer-term social and economic
example, lower than average SES, older decisions by providing useful, evidence-based and timely
information, and share Tasmanian residents' experiences and
average age, poorer health) suggested the ideas through this critical period and beyond.
state would experience COVID-19 in a way
different from other states, manifesting in Support and resources have been gathered from across the
University, with more than 40 researchers providing their
specific challenges, needs and concerns expertise (for example, staff from Menzies, Wicking, Education,
through the crisis and recovery phase. TIA, Rural Health, International Relations), and in collaboration
with organisations across government, the community sector,
and business.
This required a unique research Through 2020, The Tasmania Project supplied and collected
approach to ensure its data and opinions on a range of areas, from food insecurity to
meaningfulness to the Tasmanian the creative arts sector, to support decision making in the
community and its leaders. Department of State Growth, the State Control Centre and
Communities Tasmania, among others.
This research and report was commissioned by the secretariat to
the Premier’s Economic and Social Recovery Advisory Council
to support the Council formulate its final recommendations.
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 4
Method
The survey is based on a non-random sample of Tasmanians The research team and the University’s Regional Partnerships
aged over 18. More than 3000 individuals entered the survey, team collaborated with the aim of increasing participation in the
with a final sample size of 2354 (2308 online, 46 paper, 0 North West, the West Coast, and the East Coast of Tasmania
phone). Participants needed to be currently residing in Tasmania, through in-person and email distribution and promotion.
over the age of 18, and were required to provide informed Participants were also recruited from the existing The Tasmania
consent to participate in the study as per The Tasmania Project’s Project participant database (n=2931) via personalised emails.
approved ethics protocol (HREC Project ID 20587). 721 initial
participants were omitted from the survey as they did not fulfil the The research team worked with key community organisations
criteria for the qualifying questions or had missing data on all such as TasCOSS to connect to Neighbourhood and Community
questions. Houses to coordinate survey distribution and face-to-face
support for their cohorts. The team offered in-person survey
The survey consisted of three parts, and included questions completion support at several sites across the state and worked
relating to present and future wellbeing (adapting indicators from with Colony 47 and their Transition to Work program to increase
the OECD Better Life Index), Tasmania’s recovery from COVID- participation from those aged 18-25.
19, and demographic information.
While the survey was open, the research team regularly checked
The survey was open for five weeks from Monday 19 October to participation rates across demographics and compared to
Sunday 22 November 2020. The survey was available online Tasmanian census data obtained from the ABS, particularly age
(SurveyMonkey), and a telephone number was provided for groups, gender and local government areas, to identify areas of
people without internet access or digital devices/skills to contact underrepresentation. It deployed communications or support to
us by phone for help to complete the survey. Paper-based address the gaps.
surveys were also used to support face-to-face recruitment of a
wider range of participants. Quantitative data were analysed The survey was complemented by interviews with people aged
using SPSS software and qualitative text box responses were under 30 years. The interview sample was drawn from survey
analysed using NVivo software. In this report, we have removed respondents between the ages of 18 and 29 who had consented
details from quotes in both surveys and interviews where to be contacted for future research. From this list, approximately
respondents could potentially be identified. 160 participants were invited to participate in one-on-one
interviews. Following initial contact with potential participants,
The survey was advertised widely across a range of channels the final selection of interviewees was based upon those
including social media, Tasmania’s three major newspapers, and individuals consenting to participate. In total, 23 interviews were
university, government and community sector websites. It was completed.
supported by media releases, op-eds and interviews across ABC
and commercial radio and television. A range of government,
community and industry bodies were contacted with details of the
survey (220 community organisations, 15 peak bodies, 23 local A list of who we contacted to support
councils/authorities and 9 state government bodies) and asked to recruitment is provided as an appendix.
distribute to their members and/or networks and promote via
social media and other communications channels.
Image caption and Photo: Name Surname
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 5
The Tasmania Project and the Tasmanian
population Other survey approaches such as telephone sampling may use
The principal aim of the survey and interviews has been to databases of phone numbers for a given population (although
provide as many Tasmanian residents as possible with the these are rarely complete and again, sometimes not available),
opportunity to share their ideas and opinions with the Premier’s or researchers may employ random digit dialling to landlines and
Economic and Social Recovery Advisory Council. As with other mobile phones. However, in recent years telephone surveys
data collected through The Tasmania Project, we do not limit have seen markedly declining response rates, most likely caused
respondents to a selected demographically representative panel by survey fatigue.
as is common within the polling industry.
Similar to many other surveys, we find those with certain social
The Institute for Social Change’s objective is to strengthen characteristics tend to be more or less likely to respond. In other
access to both voice and information, and draws on a range of words, sampling bias is an issue with many surveys, because
tested and widely accepted quantitative and qualitative methods certain people (for example, men, younger people, less educated
that are appropriate to the questions being asked. Previous people) are less likely to respond. A snapshot of the sample by
findings, for example those relating to food insecurity in region and age is shown in Table 1.
Tasmania during the pandemic, have been peer reviewed and
An approach for improving the representativeness of a sample
published in leading international journals, with our methods,
involves developing sampling weights to statistically adjust
analysis and presentation of findings scrutinised by international
sample characteristics to be more representative of the
experts.
population from which they were drawn.
While we do not claim that findings are representative of the
Tasmanian population and this report refers to ‘respondents’ and We have weighted the data in some instances in the report in
‘participants’ rather than ‘Tasmanians’, we have, in some order to improve the representativeness of findings. Where we
instances, applied a method to weight findings against have weighted data, the weighted estimates are clearly
Tasmanian population data available from the Australian Bureau identified.
of Statistics.
Table 1. Sample sizes for regions x age
In practice, comprehensive sampling frames are rarely available
for those conducting public surveys. In some cases where such
‘population lists’ are extant, access is often limited and requires
special permission. For example, the electoral roll held by the
Australian Electoral Commission is essentially a list of Australian
voters, but access to the electoral roll is restricted. Even the
electoral roll itself is not a completely ‘accurate’ list of all voters at
any given time, due to registered voters’ changing address,
deaths, interstate or overseas migration.
A description of the construction of the weighted
variables is included as an appendix in the full report
available from the Institute for Social Change. Image caption and Photo: Name Surname
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 6
Tasmania’s regions
Results are reported by region as shown on this map. Each
region contains the listed Local Government Areas.
North West and West
Burnie
Devonport
Central Coast
Circular Head
Kentish
King Island
West Coast
Latrobe
Waratah/Wynyard
Regional North
Northern Midlands
George Town
Meander Valley
Dorset
Break O Day
West Tamar
Flinders Island
Launceston
Launceston
Greater Hobart
Hobart
Glenorchy
Image caption and Photo: Name Surname
Kingborough
Clarence
Brighton
Regional South
Huon Valley
Sorell Image: Adapted from TASMAP map of Tasmania LGAs
Southern Midlands
Derwent Valley
Tasman
Central Highlands
Glamorgan Spring Bay
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 7
The research draws on the OECD’s Better Life Index indicators,
adapting the brief descriptors for the Tasmania context
A comparison with OECD Better Life
indicators is included as an appendix.
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 8
Ranking the indicators
Respondents were provided with the list of wellbeing indicators and brief descriptors. They
were asked to select the top three that were most important for their wellbeing, and their
top three areas of concern for the future as Tasmania emerges from the pandemic.
Table 2. Important for wellbeing vs. concerns for future: ranked (unweighted)
Rank Important for wellbeing Concerns for the future
1 Health (64%) Health (56%)
2 Life satisfaction (42%) Income (37%)
3 Environment (38%) Environment (36%)
4 Community (31%) Jobs (35%)
5 Income (28%) Life satisfaction (32%)
6 Work-life balance (27%) Safety (26%)
7 Safety (24%) Housing (22%)
8 Housing (21%) Community (20%)
9 Jobs (21%) Work-life balance (19%)
10 Civic engagement (10%) Civic engagement (12%)
11 Education (8%) Education (8%)
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 9
Weighting the indicators
We developed variable weightings against gender and age from ABS whole-of-Tasmania
population data. Ranking of the indicators by important for wellbeing varied little, with
income moving from fifth to third in the weighted data, and environment moving from third
to fifth.
Table 2. Important for wellbeing: unweighted vs. weighted
Table 3. Important for wellbeing, unweighted vs weighted
Important for wellbeing: Important for wellbeing:
Rank
Unweighted Weighted
1 Health (64%) Health (64%)
2 Life satisfaction (42%) Life satisfaction (46%)
3 Environment (38%) Income (32%)
4 Community (31%) Community (31%)
5 Income (28%) Environment (30%)
6 Work-life balance (27%) Work-life balance (27%)
7 Safety (24%) Safety (26%)
8 Housing (21%) Housing (23%)
9 Jobs (21%) Jobs (21%)
10 Civic engagement (10%) Civic engagement (10%)
11 Education (8%) Education (8%)
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 10Weighting the indicators
Ranking of the indicators by Concerns for the future varied little after weighting the data
against gender and age from ABS whole-of-Tasmania population data, with life satisfaction
moving from fifth to third in the weighted data, and environment moving from third to fifth.
Housing and safety swapped the sixth and seventh places.
Table 2. Important for wellbeing: unweighted vs. weighted
Table 4. Concerns for future: unweighted vs weighted
Concerns for the future: Concerns for the future:
Rank
Unweighted Weighted
1 Health (56%) Health (56%)
2 Income (37%) Income (39%)
3 Environment (36%) Life satisfaction (35%)
4 Jobs (35%) Jobs (34%)
5 Life satisfaction (32%) Environment (28%)
6 Safety (26%) Housing (27%)
7 Housing (22%) Safety (26%)
8 Community (20%) Community (20%)
9 Work-life balance (19%) Work-life balance (19%)
10 Civic engagement (12%) Civic engagement (12%)
11 Education (8%) Education (10%)
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 11Levels of satisfaction
We asked respondents to tell us how satisfied they were with each of the indicators pre-
COVID compared to 'right now' (when the survey was open). In this table, we compare
ranking of indicators by the number of respondents who indicated they were very satisfied
or somewhat satisfied. When we weighted data to allow comparison at the population level,
the most notable impact was a decline in ranking of satisfaction with Education.
Table 5. Satisfaction rankings, pre-COVID vs. current, unweighted vs weighted
Unweighted Unweighted Weighted Weighted
Very or somewhat Very or somewhat Very or somewhat Very or somewhat
Rank
satisfied, pre-COVID satisfied, right now satisfied, pre-COVID satisfied, right now
1 Safety (92%) Environment (80%) Safety (90%) Environment (80%)
2 Community (84%) Housing (79%) Community (83%) Housing (76%)
3 Environment (84%) Education (78%) Environment (83%) Safety (74%)
4 Education (84%) Community (75%) Life satisfaction (80%) Community (73%)
5 Housing (83%) Safety (75%) Housing (80%) Life satisfaction (70%)
Life satisfaction
6 Life satisfaction (72%) Income (76%) Education (68%)
(82%)
7 Income (78%) Health (70%) Education (75%) Health (67%)
8 Health (77%) Income (68%) Health (75%) Income (64%)
Work-life balance Work-life balance
9 Jobs (74%) Jobs (73%)
(62%) (62%)
Civic engagement Civic engagement Civic engagement Civic engagement
10
(72%) (62%) (72%) (60%)
Work-life balance Work-life balance
11 Jobs (55%) Jobs (53%)
(69%) (70%)
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 12Jobs Safety Civic Engagement Income Life Satisfaction Community
Health Work-Life Balance Education Housing Environment
-4%
-4%
-6%
-7%
-7%
-9%
-10%
-10%
-10%
-17%
19%
Figure 1. Decrease in satisfaction (%) from pre-COVID-19 to October/November 2020 across indicators (unweighted)
Decrease in satisfaction
during COVID-19
Satisfaction declined for every measure
across all regions and age groups between
pre-COVID and October/November 2020
(when the survey was open). The areas
with which satisfaction declined the most
were jobs, income and civic engagement.
Respondents were asked to say what, if
anything, has changed or contributed to
feeling more or less satisfied compared to
before the pandemic.
This word cloud shows the most commonly
used words in response to this question.
The larger the word, the more it appeared.
Figure 2. Word cloud of responses to free text satisfaction question
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 13Importance for under 25s
In the following table, we compare the rankings of indicators for important for wellbeing
from all respondents (n=2043) to those aged 18-25 (n=227), and compared the unweighted
18-25 aged group responses with weighted data.
Table 3. Important for wellbeing: all respondents vs respondents aged 18-25
Table 6. Important for wellbeing: all respondents vs. 18-25, unweighted vs weighted
Important for Important for Important for
wellbeing: all wellbeing: respondents wellbeing: respondents
Rank respondents aged 18-25 aged 18-25
Unweighted Unweighted Weighted
1 Health (64%) Health (49%) Health (53%)
2 Life satisfaction (42%) Life satisfaction (41%) Life satisfaction (43%)
3 Environment (38%) Income (37%) Income (40%)
4 Community (31%) Jobs (35%) Work-life balance (33%)
5 Income (28%) Work-life balance (34%) Housing (32%)
6 Work-life balance (27%) Environment (30%) Jobs (31%)
7 Safety (24%) Housing (29%) Community (27%)
8 Housing (21%) Community (27%) Environment (24%)
9 Jobs (21%) Safety (22%) Safety (18%)
10 Civic engagement (10%) Education (22%) Education (22%)
11 Education (8%) Civic engagement (6%) Civic engagement (7%)
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 14Concerns for under 25s
In this table, we compare the rankings of indicators for concerns for the future from all
respondents, to those aged 18-25, and compared the unweighted responses from the 18-
25 year group with weighted data.
Table 4. Concerns for the future: all respondents vs respondents aged 18-25
Table 7. Concerns for the future: all respondents vs 18-25, unweighted vs. weighted
Concerns for the future: Concerns for the Concerns for the future:
all respondents future: respondents respondents aged 18-25
Rank aged 18-25
Unweighted Unweighted Weighted
1 Health (56%) Jobs (64%) Jobs (63%)
2 Income (37%) Income (47%) Income (48%)
3 Environment (36%) Housing (45%) Housing (37%)
4 Jobs (35%) Health (27%) Environment (27%)
5 Life satisfaction (32%) Life satisfaction (26%) Education (26%)
6 Safety (26%) Environment (25%) Health (23%)
7 Housing (22%) Education (22%) Life satisfaction (22%)
8 Community (20%) Safety (18%) Community (18%)
9 Work-life balance (19%) Community (15%) Safety (16%)
10 Civic engagement (12%) Work-life balance (13%) Work-life balance (13%)
11 Education (8%) Civic engagement (8%) Civic engagement (10%)
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 15If you could recommend one thing...
We prompted respondents to complete a text box with the following question: If you could
recommend one thing to the Premier’s Economic and Social Recovery Advisory Council to
support you and your family's future wellbeing, what would it be?
A total of 1592 participants (68%) provided text responses to this question. The responses
were categorised according to the indicators. 298 responses (18.7%) addressed multiple
indicators and specific aspects of Tasmanian life including transport, the economy and the
cost of living, the arts, small business, leadership and government, age and aged care,
tourism, and children and young people; these are identified below as 'Other'.
Table 5. Text responses per indicator and as a percentage of total responses (in descending order)
Table 8. Text box responses against Q.10
Indicator Number of responses %
Health 381 23.9
Environment 206 12.9
Jobs 181 11.4
Housing 150 9.4
Community 143 9.0
Income 131 8.2
Education 55 3.5
Work Life Balance 17 1.1
Safety 16 1.0
Life Satisfaction 11 0.7
Civic Engagement 3 0.2
Other 298 18.7
Total 1592 100.0
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 16Influencing decisions on Tasmania's future
We asked respondents to indicate their level of agreement with: “I have the opportunity to
influence decisions on Tasmania’s future”. The following tables present results by region
(table 8), age (table 9) and region by age (table 10).
Table 4. Concerns for the future: all respondents vs respondents aged 18-25
Table 9. I have the opportunity to influence decisions on Tasmania's future x regions
Greater Regional Regional North-West
Launceston Total
Hobart South North and West
Agree 333 59 73 80 116 661
30% 25% 36% 34% 34% 31%
Unsure 256 59 53 52 80 500
23% 27% 26% 22% 23% 24%
Disagree 509 110 78 103 148 948
47% 48% 38% 44% 43% 45%
Total 1098 228 204 235 344 2109
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Table 10. I have the opportunity to influence decisions on Tasmania's future x age
65 years and
18-25 years 26-44 years 45-64 years Total
above
Agree 72 116 280 169 637
32% 28% 33% 33% 31%
Unsure 64 87 184 139 474
29% 21% 21% 27% 24%
Disagree 86 215 395 209 905
39% 51% 46% 40% 45%
Total 222 418 859 517 2016
100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 17Table 11. I have the opportunity to influence decisions on Tasmania's future x age x regions, percentage (%)
18-25 years 26-44 years 45-64 years 65+ years Total
Agree 33 28 33 29 31
Greater Unsure 28 20 20 27 23
Hobart Disagree 39 52 47 44 46
Total 100 100 100 100 100
Agree 18 29 19 31 24
Regional Unsure 18 24 29 26 26
South Disagree 64 47 52 43 50
Total 100 100 100 100 100
Agree 33 26 43 35 36
Unsure 38 28 28 20 27
Launceston
Disagree 29 46 29 45 37
Total 100 100 100 100 100
Agree 50 30 34 38 35
Regional Unsure 0 20 19 26 21
North Disagree 50 50 47 36 44
Total 100 100 100 100 100
Agree 33 28 35 36 34
North-West Unsure 33 15 20 30 23
and West Disagree 33 57 45 34 43
Total 100 100 100 100 100
Agree 32 28 33 33 32
Unsure 29 21 21 27 24
Total
Disagree 39 51 46 41 45
Total 100 100 100 100 100
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 18The indicators
Health
Life Satisfaction
Environment
Community
Income
Work-life balance
Safety
Housing
Jobs
All data in the following sections are
Civic engagement
unweighted unless specified. Education
19Image caption and Photo: NameSurname
Health
Photo: Wendy Wei from Pexels
Health ranked 1st in importance for
wellbeing and 1st in concern for the future;
satisfaction with health decreased by 7
percentage points during the pandemic.
Importance
Participants were asked to specify which of the indicators
were most important for their wellbeing and health was the
most popular response, with 64% of the sample selecting
health (n=2527). This position did not change with
weighting.
A greater proportion of participants from regional and rural
Tasmania prioritised health (Regional North 70%, Regional
South 70%, North West and West 68%) compared with
Those aged 65 or over from the North
urban areas (Greater Hobart 63%, Launceston 52%). West and West were most likely to
select health as a concern for the future,
Older respondents also prioritised health (≥65 79%, 45-64
65%) compared to younger respondents (26-44 51%, 18-25
while the 18-25 age group from
49%). Females were slightly more likely (65%) than males Regional North were least likely.
(63%) to select health.
Respondents who were 65 years and above from Greater
.
Hobart and Regional South were the most likely to prioritise
health (83%), while 18-25 year olds from Launceston were Satisfaction
least likely (33%). Most respondents (77%) were very or somewhat satisfied with
their health before the pandemic (n=2356), but less satisfied
Table 12. Respondents who selected health as important for their (70%) with their health currently (n=2270).
wellbeing by region and age, percentage (%)
Respondents from Regional South (80%) were most satisfied
with their health, followed by Greater Hobart and Regional North
Greater Regional Launce Regional NW and All (79%), North West and West (74%), and Launceston (71%).
Age
Hobart South -ston North West regions Regional North were most satisfied with their health currently
(72%), followed by Southern Tasmania (Greater Hobart and
18-25 48 73 33 75 61 49
Regional South 71%), North West and West (67%), and
Launceston (66%).
26-44 51 43 52 53 56 51
45-64 65 71 51 70 65 65
A larger proportion of 65 years and above were satisfied with
their health pre-COVID-19 (84%) and currently (78%),
≥65 83 83 62 76 78 79 compared with 18-25 years (pre-COVID-19 78%, currently
66%), 45-64 years (pre-COVID-19 75%, currently 69%) and 26-
All ages 63 70 52 70 68 64 44 years (pre-COVID-19 73%, currently 67%). Minimal
differences between gender were evident.
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 20Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Unsure Somewhat dissatisfied Very dissatisfied
PRE-COVID 29 48 5 14 4
CURRENTLY 24 46 8 16 6
Figure 3. Pre-COVID-19 (n=2356) and current (n=2270) satisfaction: health, percentage (%).
Concerns for the future Qualitative data
Health ranked 1st as an area of concern for the future, with The majority of responses relating to health responded to
56% of respondents selecting this indicator (n=2239). Its fears around, and impacts of, COVID-19. Mental health
position did not change with weighting. featured heavily as a cause of concern for many
respondents who either experienced a decline in their own
The highest proportion selecting health as a concern for the mental health or were concerned about the mental health of
future were in Regional North (65%) and North West and loved ones and members of their community.
West (64%), followed by Regional South (60%). A smaller
proportion of urban residents selected health (Greater Respondents frequently reported experiencing anxiety,
Hobart 52%, Launceston 48%). depression, uncertainty and loneliness. Not being able to
participate in social gatherings, diminished access to
Older respondents were much more likely to select health as physical exercise, increased stress and financial/job
a concern for the future (≥65 79%, 45-64 59%) than younger insecurity were reasons attributed to a decline in their
respondents (26-44 38%, 18-25 27%). Minimal gender mental health. Some respondents also reported that
differences were observed. increased stress in response to the pandemic was
exacerbating existing mental health conditions including
Those aged ≥65 from North West and West were most likely PTSD, agoraphobia, anxiety and depression.
to select health (82%), while the 18-25 year age group from
Regional North were least likely (0%). Respondents reported feeling concerned for their personal
safety or the safety of family and friends if they were to
Table 13. Respondents who selected health as an area of become ill with COVID-19. Others expressed a wider
concern for their future by region and age, percentage (%) concern for the Tasmanian community and potential ripple-
on effects if Tasmania was to have another outbreak. There
Greater Regional Launce Regional NW and All
was concern that the Tasmanian health system may
Age struggle under the weight of an outbreak and that COVID-19
Hobart South -ston North West regions
would impair the system. Older participants in particular
18-25 27 46 25 0 22 27 reported feeling concerned about acquiring the virus.
26-44 36 34 40 40 44 38 Some respondents reported an improvement in their
physical and mental health, citing an increase in free time to
45-64 57 64 46 64 65 59 focus on eating better, exercising more, and preparing
healthy food. While a decrease in work hours was a source
≥65 80 73 71 79 82 79
of concern for many, for some it led to an improvement in
their overall sense of wellbeing as they felt they were able to
All ages 52 60 48 65 64 56
‘slow down’.
“I feel less safe because I am immunosuppressed
and I worry all the time about catching COVID-19. I
I cannot do the things I want because of wear a mask whenever I leave the house, I only go
to the chemist, doctor and hospital and for very
my health
physically distanced dog walks. I wear gloves to
Most disagreed that they “cannot do the things I want” unwrap anything delivered. I didn’t need to be so
because of their health (63%), while 31% agreed and 6% vigilant before.” (Female, 58, North)
were unsure (n=2070).
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 21“My health has improved because I’ve had time to "My mental health took a dive as I am
research and consider better options and weight loss recovering” (Male, 45, South)
while in lockdown. Forced family time has also helped
our collective mental health. Having my husband work
from home, while difficult for him, was beneficial for "Simply put, at the time I lost maybe 2 years
our children because of the amount of time we all of personal improvements in approx 2
spent together.” (Female, 41, South) months. The mental toll that had on me
was unexpected and significant. Hindsight
would have had me somewhat more
“The pandemic put into stark perspective the
‘relaxed’ about it and I have since re-
importance of community engagement and
opening of the parks picked up much of that
participation and highlighted the importance of
lost ground. If there is a second wave .......
health to every other thing in life.” (Male, 56,
please bear in mind just how important
North)
physical activity is for health - definitely limit
numbers and proximity ........ but open air
"Better support to mental health services" (Non-
environments????” (Male, 62, North)
binary, 24, North-West)
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 22“This has been a seriously tough year for mental health, and I’m not
sure how safe my job is. My home needs work I’m scared to pay for
right now.” (Female, 42, South)
Health: Importance for wellbeing Health: Concern for the future
Health: Satisfaction pre-COVID-19 Health: Satisfaction now
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 23Image caption and Photo: NameSurname
Photo: Wicking Dementia Research and Education Centre
Life Satisfaction
Life satisfaction ranked 2nd in importance
for wellbeing and 5th in concern for the
future; life satisfaction decreased by
10 percentage points during the pandemic.
Importance
Life satisfaction ranked 2nd in importance for wellbeing with
43% of the sample selecting this indicator (n=2527). The
ranking did not change with weighting.
Northern Tasmanians prioritised life satisfaction (Regional
North 47%, North West and West 46%, Launceston 42%)
more than Southern Tasmanians (Regional South and
Greater Hobart both 42%).
More of the oldest respondents prioritised life satisfaction
(≥65 50%), compared to other ages (45-64 42%, 18-25 More of our oldest respondents
41%, 26-44 38%). Males were much more likely to select life prioritised life satisfaction, compared to
satisfaction as important for their wellbeing (53%) than other ages.
females (38%).
Respondents who were 65 years and above and from
Greater Hobart and Regional North were most likely to
select life satisfaction (53%). 18-25 years from Regional Satisfaction
North were the least likely (0%).
Most (82%) were very or somewhat satisfied with their lives pre-
COVID-19 (n=2355) with a decrease of 10 percentage points, to
Table 14. Respondents who selected life satisfaction as 72% currently (n=2273).
important for their wellbeing by region and age, percentage (%)
Regional North (89%) and North West and West (85%)
residents were most satisfied with their lives pre-COVID-19 and
Greater Regional Launce Regional NW and All
Age currently (Regional North 80%, North West and West 76%),
Hobart South -ston North West regions
followed by Greater Hobart (pre-COVID-19 82%, currently
18-25 40 36 50 0 44 41 71%), Regional South (pre-COVID-19 78%, currently 72%) and
Launceston (pre-COVID-19 76%, currently 69%).
26-44 36 41 38 43 44 38
Older participants were more satisfied with their lives pre-
45-64 40 39 44 46 45 42 COVID-19 (≥65 89%, 45-64 84%), and currently (≥65 83%, 45-
64 75%) compared to younger before the pandemic (26-44
≥65 53 48 38 53 49 50 76%, 18-25 73%) and currently (26-44 64%, 18-25 58%). There
were no differences between gender.
All ages 42 42 42 47 46 43
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 24Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Unsure Somewhat dissatisfied Very dissatisfied
PRE-COVID 35 47 6 9 3
CURRENTLY 26 46 9 13 5
Figure 4. Pre-COVID-19 (n=2355) and current (n=2273) satisfaction: life satisfaction, percentage (%)
Concerns for the future The pandemic has negatively impacted
Life satisfaction ranked 5th as an area of concern for the my mental health
future with 32% of respondents selecting this indicator
(n=2239). With weighting, life satisfaction moved to 3rd. Under half (44%) of respondents (n=2124) agreed the
pandemic had negatively impacted their mental health, while
Northern Tasmanians were more likely to be concerned the same percentage (44%) disagreed that their mental
about life satisfaction (Regional North 37%, Launceston health was impacted. 12% were unsure.
35%, North West and West 34%) compared to the South
(Greater Hobart 32%, Regional South 25%). Qualitative data
Older respondents were more concerned about life Allusions to life satisfaction were embedded in most
satisfaction (≥65 45%, 45-64 30%) compared with younger responses in the text-box responses. Some responses more
(18-25 26%, 26-44 25%). Males were more concerned clearly articulated respondents’ sense of life-satisfaction,
(40%) than females (29%). such as the quotes below.
Respondents who were 65 years and above and from
Greater Hobart were most likely to select life satisfaction as “I am more aware of pre-existing loneliness and
a concern for the future (48%). 18-25 years from Regional
North were the least likely (0%).
health problems with less chance to do anything
about either. I am also constrained, as a non-driver
Table 15. Respondents who selected life satisfaction as an area and without friends or Tasmania-based family, from
of concern for their future by region and age, percentage (%) accessing other parts of the state, including natural
and cultural sites.” (Female, 78, North)
Greater Regional Launce- Regional NW and All
Age
Hobart South ston North West regions
18-25 25 27 38 0 17 26 “The pandemic has taken pressure off in a lot of
ways. People seem more conscious of mental
26-44 25 16 23 27 31 25
health. People are more accepting of the need for
45-64 30 16 42 35 30 30 time out and more rest. At the same time, the
pandemic has left me feeling less satisfied with
≥65 48 45 35 47 42 45
how I feel about the future. The uncertainty is very
All ages 32 25 35 37 34 32 destabilising.” (Female, 36, North)
Thinking ahead 3 years, compared to Many participants, when asked about their life satisfaction,
reported that their life had stayed very much the same. Some,
now, how do you think your life in however, were quite explicit about their life being either
general will be? satisfying or unsatisfying.
Just under half (46%) of respondents (n=2204) indicated
they thought their life would be about the same in three “My overall life satisfaction is unsatisfying.”
years, one third (34%) selected somewhat or a lot better, (Female, 45, South)
and less than one quarter (20%) selected somewhat or a lot
worse.
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 25“Identify the unexpected positives that have come out of 2020, and build on them. For example:
- people spending more time at home, and doing things like gardening that improve wellbeing
- people connecting more to their local area, and local tourism.” (Female, 36, South)
.
Life Satisfaction: Importance for wellbeing Life Satisfaction: Concern for the future
Life Satisfaction: Satisfaction pre-COVID-19 Life Satisfaction: Satisfaction now
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 26Under 30s
INTERVIEWS
A good life is...
Photo: Osborne Images
“I'd like to have financial security. I don't need to be “I think a good life is having work that you can be
obscenely wealthy, but I'd just like to have a little satisfied with. Not necessarily always enjoy … But a
house that I'm comfortable with that I own, that I can job that you can come home at the end of the day
put pictures I like on the wall and have a dog. I'm not and be satisfied with what you've done … work that
stressed about losing it, but that maybe I only work you can be satisfied with the time, energy and money,
four days a week, so I have time to do the things I I guess, to go out and do a bit of things with your
need to do for me and enjoy that wealth I've created friends, even if it's, you know, going to a restaurant
for myself … A good life is ecologically sustainable … once every now and again or just something some
A good lifestyle is connected … a good life for me is leisure activity. And, you know, the sort of safety and
moderation of all the good things, giving and taking. health of my family. That's a good life for me.”
Balance.” (Female, 30, South) (Female, 21, South)
"Just being happy and healthy. Health's definitely a big “A good life to me [personally is] happiness
contributor to being happy. I think a lot of people do and good health, but, I mean, I'm in a fairly
take our health for granted … I think that would make privileged position, so a good life for me would mean
you happy in the long run if you've got good food and that everyone has equity for opportunities … people
happy environment and you're happy with your work
have aspirational goals of having houses, being rich,
and employment is definitely a big thing too." (Female,
having a really great job, but imagine if we all had one
25, North-West)
percent less of our wealth [and that meant] other
people could also realistically achieve those goals,
"A comfortable living situation. So, kind of housing, too … Yeah - equity for other people as
a job [and] time to be able to focus on family and well.” (Female, 30, South)
that kind of thing. So those would be the core things.
And I think - I guess in general and specific to
“Yeah, just a balanced life. Yeah. Me and
Tasmania is being able to keep your connection with
my community and the people around me feel safe
nature. That's something very important in Tasmania
and able to feel safe and connected and feel able to
and so I'd love for that to continue to be to be a focus
sort of engage in the things that are meaningful to
and something that's very accessible to
them.” (Female, 26, South)
people." (Male, 22, South)
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 27Image caption and Photo: NameSurname
Photo: Stu Gibson
Environment
Environment ranked 3rd in importance for
wellbeing and 3rd in concern for the future;
satisfaction with environment decreased by
4 percentage points during the pandemic.
Importance
Environment ranked 3rd in importance for wellbeing (38%
selected this, n=2527), falling to 5th with data weighting.
A higher proportion of residents from regional areas of
Tasmania prioritised the environment (Regional South 41%,
Regional North 38%), compared to urban (Greater Hobart
38%, Launceston 38%) and rural areas (North West and A higher proportion of residents from
West 33%). regional areas of Tasmania prioritised
the environment, compared to urban
Older respondents selected environment (≥65 42%, 45-64
39%) over younger respondents (26-44 years 32%, 18-25 and rural areas.
years 30%). Females were more likely to select environment
(38%) than males (35%).
Those aged 18-25 from Regional North (50%) were most
likely to select environment as important for their wellbeing,
while 26-44 years from North West and West were least
likely (20%). Satisfaction
84% of respondents were very or somewhat satisfied with
Table 16. Respondents who selected environment as important environment pre-COVID-19 (n=2347), and 80% were very or
for their wellbeing by region and age, percentage (%) somewhat satisfied at the time of the survey (n=2259).
Greater Hobart residents were the most satisfied with
Greater Regional Launce Regional NW and All environment pre-COVID-19 (86%), followed by North West and
Age
Hobart South -ston North West regions West (84%), Launceston (83%), Regional North (81%) and
Regional South (80%). North West and West were the most
18-25 27 36 38 50 44 30
satisfied currently (84%), then Greater Hobart and Regional
26-44 34 35 33 33 20 32 North (80%), and Regional South and Launceston (77%).
45-64 39 39 39 44 36 39 26-44 year olds were the most satisfied pre-COVID-19 (86%),
followed by 18-25 (85%), ≥65 (84%) and 45-64 (83%).
≥65 48 48 40 30 34 42 Currently, 26-44 year olds were the most satisfied with
environment (82%), followed by ≥65 (81%), 45-64 (80%) and
All ages 38 41 38 38 33 37 18-25 (77%). There were no differences between gender.
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 28Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Unsure Somewhat dissatisfied Very dissatisfied
PRE-COVID 44 40 5 8 3
CURRENTLY 37 43 6 9 5
Figure 5. Pre-COVID (n=2347) and current (n=2259) satisfaction: environment, percentage (%)
Concerns for the future Importance of Tasmania's natural
Environment ranked 3rd as an area of concern for the future
environment: weighted
(36% selected this, n=2239), moving to 5th with data The following tables provide an example of how weighting
weighting. the sample data can impact results. While responses to
Participants from Regional South (40%) and Greater Hobart these ‘natural environment’ questions remain at the very
(37%) were the most concerned, followed by Regional North important and important end of the scale, there is
(37%), Launceston (33%) and North West and West (30%). some difference in the emphasis placed upon responses in
the weighted and unweighted data.
Older respondents were more concerned about the
environment (≥65 42%, 45-64 39%) than younger Table 18. Importance of Tasmania’s natural environment for
respondents (26-44 28%, 18-25 25%). Females (37%) were own recreation, leisure and wellbeing
more likely to be concerned about the environment than
males (33%).
Unweighted (%) Weighted (%) Difference
Those aged 65 and over from Greater Hobart (49%) were
the most concerned about the environment for the future,
Very important 64.8 58.0 -6.8
while 18-25 years from Regional South were the least
concerned (9%). Somewhat
18.0 23.8 5.8
important
Table 17. Respondents who selected environment as an area of Unsure 0.9 0.6
1.5
concern for their future by region and age, percentage (%)
Somewhat
1.8 2.4 0.6
unimportant
Greater Regional Launce Regional NW and All
Age Very unimportant 0.6 0.1
Hobart South -ston North West regions 0.7
18-25 24 9 25 25 44 25 Missing 14.0 13.5 -0.5
26-44 33 32 19 13 18 28
Table 19. Importance of Tasmania’s natural environment to
45-64 40 40 37 48 32 39
Tasmania’s brand and economic advantage
≥65 49 48 45 30 29 42
All ages 37 40 33 37 30 36 Unweighted (%) Weighted (%) Difference
Very important 54.8 52.3 -2.5
Importance of Tasmania's natural Somewhat
20.2 2.3
important 22.5
environment
Unsure 5.1 5.5 0.4
Respondents considered Tasmania’s natural environment to Somewhat
be most important for their own recreation, leisure and 3.8 3.1 -0.7
unimportant
wellbeing (n=2179, 96% important, 1% unsure, 3%
Very unimportant 1.9 2.5 0.6
unimportant), followed by the global environment (n=2173,
92% important, 4% unsure, 4% unimportant) and Tasmania's Missing 14.2 14.2 0
brand and economic advantage (n=2173, 87% important, 6%
unsure, 7% unimportant).
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 29the environment and the need for the government and the
Table 20. Importance of Tasmania’s natural environment for the Tasmanian community to take the climate crisis seriously.
global environment Action measures included rolling out state-wide electric vehicle
charging stations, installing solar panels, growing food,
Unweighted (%) Weighted (%) Difference fundraising for climate activism, purchasing electric vehicles
and/or bicycles, doing environmental remediation work and
Very important 63.6 56.3 -7.3 weed elimination. Some respondents voiced their concern that
the pandemic was hindering action on climate change and
Somewhat
15.4 19.9 4.5 environmental protection, with many expressing concern that
important
attention and funds being diverted from bushfire reduction
Unsure 3.4 4.8 1.4 measures and responses to climate change.
Somewhat
2.3 2.6 0.3 “And it was great for carbon emissions! Post-
unimportant
Very unimportant 1.1 2.0 0.9 lockdown, my employer is still letting us work one day
a week from home, which I really appreciate-- but I
Missing 14.2 14.4 0.2 can feel myself slipping backwards. And I am so
discouraged that the pandemic appears to have
The main difference (stronger for ‘recreation’ and ‘global completely overwhelmed the issue of climate change,
environment’) is the shift from the ‘very important’ to which is not going away.” (Female, 59, South)
‘important’ response category when PESRAC data are
weighted. While the environment remains extremely “Please take more care with our environment for
important for the vast majority of Tasmanians, somewhat future generations.” (Male, 53, North)
fewer believe the environment is ‘very important’ when the
data are weighted. “Plan for a low emissions environment, promote
electric vehicles and their infrastructure, stop logging
Qualitative data old growth forests, get FSC FFS. Kill pokies in pubs.
Climate-related comments featured heavily throughout the Build electric buses in Tassie, make the government
text-box responses in this survey, with environmental issues fleet electric. Shine a light on donations to political
and concerns playing a key role in respondents’ perception
of life satisfaction and concern for the future. These
parties, act ethically.” (Male, 64, South)
concerns were at an individual, state and global scale. Some
“Face up to the climate crisis, make environmental
participants responded to their individual experience of the
environment and how important this was for their sense of protection & rehabilitation & biodiversity first priority,
wellbeing, as articulated in the following case: wind back human population and consumption. Well,
that’s actually three things - but they are all linked.”
“I feel more satisfied with the quality and access to (Male, 69, North-West)
the natural environment, and importantly, my
There were also responses that touched on the natural
appreciation of how lucky we are in Tasmania that
environment in terms of quality and access.
all of us, regardless of our social status can readily
access natural areas for our mental and physical “My access to the environment has mattered to me
well-being.” (Female, 53, South) more because I want to walk and ride my bike in the
local area and we have limited access due to shortage
Others focused on Tasmania’s environment as a valuable
resource in and of itself:
of safe foot paths and bikeways.” (Female, 66,
Kingborough)
“Fully protect Tasmania's natural heritage -
wilderness and other wild places - and protect “I feel more satisfied with the quality and access to the
public access to them all. Take meaningful and natural environment, and importantly, my appreciation
urgent action to reduce Tasmania's carbon of how lucky we are in Tasmania that all of us,
emissions and promote and support more regardless of our social status can readily access
renewable energy (solar, wind). Roll out state-wide natural areas for our mental and physical well-being”.
EV charging stations, expand public transport (Female, 53, Glenorchy)
(electric powered).” (Unspecified gender, 54, “I am more aware of the importance access to nature
South) (especially with my dog...) has on my daily life. Access
Many respondents reported concern about climate change, to parks that are close to CBDs, access to water,
emissions reductions, carbon reduction, and carbon natural and free space rather than constructed and
sequestration. These concerns were voiced in the first text- designed for specific purposes. I have also noticed
box response relating to life satisfaction, and in areas where I can walk or cycle with my obedient dog
recommendations for the government. There was a strong
focus on collective climate action, the long-term future of unleashed are not that many and variety is important
when we are restricted in movement (car availability/
confinement, etc)” (unspecified)
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 30“The economic recovery needs to be based on environmental
sustainability without compromise.” (Male, 69, North-West)
Environment: Importance for wellbeing Environment: Concern for the future
Environment: Satisfaction pre-COVID-19 Environment: Satisfaction now
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 31Under 30s
INTERVIEWS
Environment
Photo: University of Tasmania
“I love Tasmania because of the nature that is here. "I like a lot of things living in Tasmania … you
So you can be in the city centre and drive 10 minutes can never be more than half an hour away from
and be in the jungle feel of Mount Wellington, or I a bushland area. And I like living in that kind
think Tasmania is kind of world renowned for its of environment … I think the most beautiful place
hiking and I love hiking … I think every Tasmanian that I would love to go every month would be Maria
has a bit of pride, pride that, like, you know, Island. It is a secluded area. It's like the true get away
Southwest National Park is really protected and we … [I also like] how people are really looking toward
have a massive chunk of our land that [saved] for a sustainable living … when I start[ed] trying to
nature … I think there's a unique landscape here and live sustainably and recycle everything I started hiring
there's a real sense of wonder … we have we have a garden plot in South Hobart. There's a
we have everything. We've got beaches. We've got community garden there and I have a compost bin …
mountains. We've got valleys. You do have that I want to take part in the climate change [and] take
temperate jungle feel. We do have that kind of bushy care of the environment. And, I just I couldn't see
grassy feel. Yeah, I think that's just a real sense of anywhere else better to do it than in
the varied, varied things you can do that make it Tasmania." (Male, 25, South)
exciting.” (Female, 24, South)
"I love the environment. It's a beautiful,
beautiful place. I think one of the most beautiful in the
world. We're so lucky to have so much on our
doorstep, that I can live - like, there's very few places
in the world where I could live or grow up 20 minutes
from a capital city in the middle of the bush in a place
that didn't have cell reception. Like, that, that's -
it's such an amazing place." (Male, 23, South)
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 32Image caption and Photo: NameSurname
Community Photo: Claudine Van Massenhove / Shutterstock.com
Community ranked 4th in importance for
wellbeing and 8th in concern for the future;
satisfaction decreased by 9 percentage
points during the pandemic.
Importance
Community was the 4th most popular response when
respondents were asked what indicators were most
important for their wellbeing, with 31% selecting community
(n=2527). This ranking did not change with weighting.
Urban residents placed greater importance on community
(Launceston 36%, Greater Hobart 33%) than regional
(Regional South 30%, Regional North 31%) and rural (North
West and West 29%). The oldest respondents in the sample
prioritised community (65 or over),
The oldest respondents in the sample prioritised community
(≥65 40%), followed by 26-44 (32%), 45-64 (28%) and 18-25 followed by 26-44, 45-64 and 18-25
year olds (27%). Females were more likely to select year olds.
community as important for their wellbeing (33%), compared
with males (27%).
Participants aged 65 or over from Launceston were the most Satisfaction
likely to choose community (54%), while 18-25 years from 84% of participants were very or somewhat satisfied with their
Regional North were the least likely (0%). community before the pandemic (n=2347), while only 75% were
very or somewhat satisfied at the time of the survey (a decrease
of 9 percentage points, n=2259).
Table 21. Respondents who selected community as important
for their wellbeing by region and age, percentage (%) Regional North residents were the most satisfied with their
community before the pandemic (87%), followed by North West
and West (86%), Greater Hobart (85%), Regional South (82%)
Greater Regional Launce- Regional NW and All and Launceston (79%). Participants from North West and West
Age
Hobart South ston North West regions
and Regional South were the most satisfied currently (78%),
18-25 28 27 38 0 11 27
followed by Greater Hobart (76%), Regional North (75%) and
Launceston (71%).
26-44 34 16 19 43 40 32
Older participants were the most satisfied pre-COVID-19 (≥65
45-64 30 28 33 25 22 28 90%), followed by 45-64 (84%), 18-25 (81%) and 26-44 (80%).
Although satisfaction declined, those aged 65 years and above
≥65 40 41 54 37 37 40 were still the most satisfied (82%), followed by 45-64 (77%), 26-
44 (70%) and 18-25 (65%).
All ages 33 30 36 31 29 32
Females were more satisfied with their community pre-COVID-
19 (86%) and currently (78%) compared with males (82%,
73%).
The Tasmania Project – Share your experience during COVID-19 33You can also read
